Replies

Strictly speaking, Western Civilization doesn't have Judeo-Christian roots; they're Greek. It is, however, now heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian ethics. One could argue that the tolerant nature of the West helped to propel the Gospel out of the Mid-east and into the rest of the world. It has never stopped being tolerant of outside ideas.

You are quite correct that our laws reflect much of the religiously inspired morality of the Founders. In retrospect, they should have been more careful. Marriage laws, for example, should never have been written. Marriage is a private matter between two consenting adults; not a thing for the government to license. (And other than getting my wallet lightened, I still don't know how my wife and I benefited from getting a marriage license!)

By allowing one religion to insert its beliefs into the law, we've opened the door for other religions to do the same. I don't want Jainists writing laws forbidding the eating of meat, or Muslims writing laws requiring women to wear burqas and thus I can't expect to see Christians writing laws according to our sense of morality.

Marriage confers things like citizenship upon a person in this country. There are a lot of reasons for government to issue marriage licenses.

Strictly speaking, Western Civilization doesn't have Judeo-Christian roots; they're Greek. It is, however, now heavily influenced by Judeo-Christian ethics. One could argue that the tolerant nature of the West helped to propel the Gospel out of the Mid-east and into the rest of the world. It has never stopped being tolerant of outside ideas.

Yes, yes, I was taking a verbal shortcut. And tolerance of Judeo-Christian ethics has arguably a net positive to Western Civ., because properly implemented (NOT as in the Inquisition, etc.) they are fairly compatible. And we both worry whether or not this is likely to hold true for every religion.

By allowing one religion to insert its beliefs into the law, we've opened the door for other religions to do the same. I don't want Jainists writing laws forbidding the eating of meat, or Muslims writing laws requiring women to wear burqas and thus I can't expect to see Christians writing laws according to our sense of morality.

Of course, I don't want to live under Sharia law, either. But I don't quite agree with your wording. I think a Christian is specifically under an obligation to at least respect the Christian sense of morality in writing laws. In some cases, that may indeed translate to taking an amoral approach to the law, because it best allows the Christian to practice his morality. However, amorality is a slippery slope, too.